East Anglia University in Norwich, England is of the one of the leading authorities on global temperature levels and has promoted the theory that global warming is a man-made phenomenon that will have disastrous consequences if not addressed immediately. Last week it came to light that some of their data integrity and scientific methods are in question.
E-mails from the university’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) were released last week, either via a hacker or a whistleblower. These e-mails indicate that scientists in the CRU were finessing data in order to ensure that it fit the parameters necessary to validate global warming. Some e-mails indicate that “tricks” were used to hide data that did not support the claim that long-term global temperatures have been increasing over the past 150 years, and that some at the CRU were cheered by the death of a global warming skeptic.
Since the 1,000 e-mails and 2,000 documents were made public last week, it has also been revealed that documents containing the raw measurement data used to support the CRU’s global warming claims have been thrown away. It was claimed that the papers and tapes were discarded in order to save space when moving to a new building.
This latest revelation comes two days after the CRU announced that it would release its data as soon as possible, in an effort to provide transparency and to assuage skeptics. It is unclear if the data that remains will provide insight to the global warming debate, since what is left is adjusted data, and without the original raw data it is likely that the conclusions drawn cannot be validated.
Skeptics of global warming have been frustrated by the lack of debate on the issue. Led by John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, more than 31,000 scientists (including over 9,000 PhDs) have added their name to the list of scientists who refute the claim that global warming is a man-made phenomenon. Compare this to the 2,500 scientists on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
In spite of the fact that twelve times as many scientists disagree with global warming claims, the U.S. Climate Czar, Carol Browner, concluded, “I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.”
Scott Gibbs, the White House Press Secretary, touts that “several thousand” scientists have come to the conclusion that “climate change is happening and is not, among most people, in dispute.” When asked about the 31,000 scientists who disagree, how can he claim that there is “no real scientific basis” for refuting it?
One can only hope that if Obamacare is voted into law, such questionable standards and practices won't be used when making life or death decisions about the scientific validity of medical procedures. We can only pray that procedural outcomes will not be a foregone conclusion, in spite of the evidence and expertise at hand, as we have seen in the global warming debate.